For the first time in recent memory, the heads of all three branches of student government were invited to the Trustee Luncheon, and I cherished the chance to sit at lunch with a trustee and voice student concerns. I attended the luncheon as a student representative, with high hopes to convince the trustee at my table that some of the most pressing issues facing students were financial aid and race relations. Unfortunately, those efforts were overshadowed by the shouting match that ensued during the question and answer period. I believe John Dowling's anger is matched only by my indignance at being associated with the shouting mob.
This display brought back memories of the march on Ballou that took place my freshman year. Once again, it's not the message that is at fault, it's the delivery. And once again, the issue has been lost in the resulting uproar over manners, as if manners are actually more important than quelling hate mail to Capen House.
But you have to know your audience, and as in the march on Ballou, this audience was not receptive to the style of presentation. Pritesh Gandhi's stirring speech on the racial divide at Tufts would have been enough for the trustees at this particular moment. I could tell that the message was sinking in while he was speaking, and yelling at the trustees for something they cannot immediately change probably accomplished less than letting those eloquent words stand on their own merit.
Insulting the trustees and showing no appreciation for their hard work on a new dorm shows a lack of commitment to student issues that were important yesterday, and a desire simply to protest without thought to the loss of student credibility caused by such comments.
Unfortunately, in my four years here, and in my three years as an active campus citizen, I have found this desire to shout for one day and ask someone else to fix the problem to be a disturbing trend present in many of the minority leaders of the Tufts community. I care deeply about race relations on this campus. Unfortunately, it seems to me that the some of the "culture groups" aren't willing to put in the necessary work to improve the current climate.
For example, I have spoken to numerous active members of some of the culture/political groups, and none of them knew how one was chosen as a member of the Committee on Student Life, possibly the most powerful student/faculty committee at Tufts. Some seemed to believe that students are selected by the faculty. The students are not handpicked, however, they are elected by the student body. But for the last two years, this election has been uncontested. I wish this were an anomaly, but unfortunately, the same holds true for the TCUJ, a body which directly helps influence guilt or innocence of students in the disciplinary system, and which controls the recognition of student groups. Last year's general senate election was also uncontested.
The belief that student government does not represent minority concerns leads to a vicious cycle. Culture groups don't run candidates, candidates with other priorities are elected, and student government does not represent culture groups as effectively as it could. This again leads to a lack of candidates from culture groups.
This is not true of all minority groups. South Asians, many of whom are actively connected with TASA, are traditionally well represented on senate. This creates a strong voting block that can prioritize issues like the creation of Hindi/Urdu language courses. Instead of following the example of TASA, however, it seems that some of the cultural communities would rather yell at trustees. Even though the three planned "questions" were eloquent, and importantly, true, they took much less work than being on the senate for an entire year. The work of improving race relations is not accomplished in a dramatic protest to the trustees, it is done in the sometimes boring and monotonous meetings and work that occurs daily on this campus when those who are truly committed to improving Tufts continue their struggle. Yelling at the trustees or marching on Ballou may make one feel better, but the real progress will be accomplished quietly, without the drama that characterized last weekend's luncheon.
Change may be accomplished by working outside the system, however, it will never occur without the help of those inside the system, and the culture groups on this campus have the political power to elect senators, judiciary members and CSL representatives. These members of student government would then have the student mandate to hold the administration accountable for implementing necessary changes, for example, the proposals laid out by the Task Force on Race. I challenge those who truly care about Tufts and its students to run for seats in student government, and not to be content with pacifying themselves with a diatribe to the unsuspecting trustees.
